Xcopy

ct, actually I think I ended up will too many registrys and not enough operating systems

show all files

I think I'm a voyeur, hidden files bug me First thing I do is expose those little buggers

[BBA]

ctaylor, the registry files ARE the system files.

My guess is you did not copy all files because some have system/hidden attributes set.

Did anyone notice how slow this xcopy32 works? I mean if you copy stuff under a windows environment, it's like 4 times faster.

Just an observation ....

[ctaylor]

BBA, my understanding is that XCOPY32.EXE is a 32 bit app which can only be run from within windows (since DOS is a 16 bit environment).

When you use all the above mentioned switches you copy all files with the exception of the page file and the registry which could not be copied because Windows had those files in use.

This is why I suggested booting into DOS and changing the attributes of the registry files so that they could be copied within DOS, then resettign the attributes of those registry files in order to make a "restore drive" which was bootable.

You are right though, USER.DAT and SYSTEM.DAT are both system files and I should have clarified.

ctaylor, true but when you boot to a win98 disk, the dos which gets loaded- is it 16 or 32 bit. Cause, xcopy32 works when you boot from a floppy. Don'r know if it works from within windows.

[ctaylor]

shahani - I learn something new every day.

I just did a quick google.com search on xcopy32 and this is what I found:

1) In Win95 XCOPY.EXE and XCOPY32.EXE were 2 separate programs with different features. XCOPY32.EXE was originally developed to allow for XCOPY.EXE functionality while adding perservation of long file names.

2) In Win98 XCOPY.EXE and XCOPY32.EXE are identical in that they both invoke XCOPY32.MOD. The reason for having both programs invoke the same proceedure was to allow users backwards compatibility with the familliar XCOPY.EXE MS DOS command while still preserving long file names.

This leads me to think that I was wrong in my understanding that XCOPY32.EXE was a 32 bit app.

I fear that a diuscussion of XCOPY could turn into another big topic all by itself.....

I fear that a diuscussion of XCOPY could turn into another big topic all by itself.....

Don't be frightened ct,, we'll be genle.

[BFlurie]

It all seems confusing to me. Isn't the whole point of a program like Xcopy(32) to copy in pure DOS? If so, I don't see how long filenames can be supported in that environment no matter if it's xcopy or xcopy32 -- it still won't preserve 'em. 'Course, there are other apps out there that will.

ctaylor, you are right about xcopy32 being a 32 bit application. As far as I know, booting from a win98/ME floppy "invokes a 32 bit DOS environment" . Is this gibberish?

Maybe you can start a new thread on this. Surreal's promised to be gentle.

Hey surreal, did ya get the screensaver? freescreensaver.com

No s.

[ctaylor]

When ever I have run XCOPY32.EXE from safe mode on Win9X, I have been able to preserve long file names.

Why this works is another question.